The Illusive Nature of Town Ball
by Jeffrey Kittel
When researching the origins of American bat and ball games, one comes across the term “town ball,” time and again, and this discovery often leads one to ask a seemingly innocent question: What was town ball? However, there is truly nothing innocent about the question and it leads, invariably, to a morass of information found in secondary sources. These sources are filled with the reminiscences of old men, speaking or writing about events of a half century earlier, giving details about a game called town ball (or townball or town-ball) that they played in their youth. These stories often include a declarative statement that it is obvious or clear or self-evident that baseball had evolved from this childhood pastime. To many men who grew up in the first half of the nineteenth century, it was an accepted fact that baseball was town ball “reduced to a science.”1 In their mind, the origins of baseball were found in the schoolyards of their youth, when they and their friends played a game that they, describing it years after the fact, called town ball.
When wading into the morass of these secondary sources, as well as the few primary sources that mention town ball in the first half of the 19th century, it quickly becomes obvious that, although people were using the same term to describe a game they played as a child, nobody was describing the same game. The term “town ball,” as used in the secondary sources of the late 19th century and early 20th century, appears to be a catchall that described variants of an unregulated folk game played by children and young adults. Certainly, these games had a great deal in common. There is no doubt that they were bat and ball, safe haven games that involved pitching, hitting, catching and running and there is a great deal of evidence to suggest these games spread across the United States from common sources. But it is also clear that there was not a specific, national set of rules governing a specific, national game called town ball. As used in these secondary sources, the term “town ball” has a very general meaning that describes “various versions of early baseball” that were played throughout the United States in the first half of the 19th century.2
Complicating matters is the fact that these baseball variants that were generally referred to, in the secondary sources, as town ball also had regionally specific names at the time they were being played. Games that were generally labeled as town ball in 1880 very well may have been called town ball in 1850. They also could have been called round ball or base ball or long town or round town or any of a variety of names that have been documented. In Illinois, for example, a series of county histories were written in the late 19th century and, within them, we find countless recollections about a game called town ball being played in Illinois in the first half of the 19th century. However, there is nothing in the primary source material that corroborates this. Instead, we find a source from 1858 that describes a local bat and ball variant played in Alton, Illinois, that was called “the old and popular pastime of ‘Base Ball.’”3 It is obvious from descriptions of the games played in Alton that this was not the New York game but, rather, one of the local baseball variant that was being described, forty years later, as town ball.
Another example of the semantic confusion that surrounds town ball is the Massachusetts Game. A very specific and well-documented baseball variant, the Massachusetts Game has often been described as being town ball and the two terms have been used synonymously. But prior to its codification in 1858, it appears that the local baseball variant in Massachusetts was known as round ball or Massachusetts round ball and that “No game called Town Ball was known in Massachusetts.”4 So while the Massachusetts Game was a general town ball game, as the term was used in the secondary sources in the late 19th century, the local baseball variant in Massachusetts was probably never called town ball.
So while it appears that the term “town ball” developed, in the later part of the 19th century, to describe regional baseball variants played in the first half of the century, regardless of what they were called at the time, there is primary source evidence that shows the term being used as a name for specific games played during the first half of the century. The most famous example of this would be the baseball variant that developed in Philadelphia in the late 1820s and we find the earliest known reference to town ball in the May 14, 1838, edition of Philadelphia’s Public Ledger. In a letter to the editor, a gentleman described a game that he witnessed in Camden, New Jersey: “A small distance from the woods, I beheld a party of young men, the majority of whom I afterwards distinguished to be Market street merchants; and who styled themselves the ‘Olympic Club,’ a title well answering to its name by the manner in which the party amused themselves in the recreant pleasure of town ball, and several other games.”5 This is, of course, a reference to the Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia, which according to Richard Herschberger, “was by far the longest-lived baseball club of the amateur era. Its origins go as far back as 1831, when a group of Philadelphians in their twenties gathered to play ball. Two years later they merged with another group, which was loosely organized and went by the name ‘Olympic.’ The combined group kept this name and adopted a formal constitution.” He goes on to note that the club “crossed the Delaware River to play in Camden, New Jersey” due to the availability there of open spaces for play.6 In the Book of American Pastimes, Charles Peverelly also described the origins of the club, noting that when the club met for the first time, in the spring of 1831, “there were but four players, and the game was ‘Cat Ball,’ or what is called in some parts of New England, ‘Two Old Cat.’ The players, who were then over 25 years old, told some of their younger friends of the pleasure and advantage they found in resuming their boyish sports, and invited them to join and make up a number large enough for a game of Town Ball.”7
It’s apparent, based upon Peverelly’s account, that there was ball-playing in Philadelphia prior to the formation of town ball clubs in the early 1830s. Trap Ball was being played in the city by 18228 and William Ryczek, in Baseball’s First Inning, notes that town ball was being played in the city by the late 1820s.9 There can be no doubt that there was a strong and vibrant ball-playing culture in Philadelphia prior to the formation of the Olympic Club and ball-playing there probably dates back to the late 17th or early 18th century. By the late 1820s, these local ball-playing traditions had produced a unique and specific game that was known as town ball and this game would be remain popular in Philadelphia through the 1850s.
In Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky, the local ball-playing culture, during the antebellum era, also produced a game known locally as town ball. There is primary source evidence of town ball clubs in Cincinnati as well as in Brooklyn, Newport and Covington, Kentucky, and these clubs were active in the 1850s and through the war years.10 The primary source material also shows a specific game called town ball being played in South Carolina11, Missouri12, Illinois13, Indiana14, Texas15, Utah16, Louisiana17, California18, Wisconsin19, Western New York20 and Iowa.21 These sources range in date from the 1840s through the Civil War years, involve games played by organized clubs as well as more informal games and establish that specific baseball variants, locally known as town ball, evolved throughout the United States in antebellum era.
It should be noted, however, that these games were not related to each other in any official manner; these games most likely developed independently of each other and any commonality that the games shared reflected the general nature of bat and ball games in the United States. While the common source of these games were the bat and ball games brought to North America by English colonists in the 17th century, as these ancestor games spread across the continent, they were adapted, changed and evolved into the variants that the locals called town ball. These variants that we see throughout the United States, prior to the spread of the New York game, is evidence of a broad ball-playing culture that existed in the 19th century and spread across the continent with the Anglo-American settlers.
If these games were essentially unrelated variants of older bat and ball games, an interesting question arises as to how they ended up with the same name. How did all of these baseball variants come to be called town ball? There is an old canard that the term came about because the game was played at town meetings but there is no evidence to support this. It is possible that the term originated in the East and spread West along with the ancestor games and it’s also possible that the term is a corruption of the term round ball, which was commonly used in the East as a name of the local baseball variant. But, again, there is no evidence to support this. What we know is that the term town ball, along with round ball and base ball, was “one of the three most common designations for American baseball in the first half of the nineteenth century.”22 It’s likely that more research will discover earlier references to the game that will shed light on the etymology of the term town ball but, as of now, we don’t know enough to speculate intelligently on how the term developed and spread across the country.
One interesting aspect of how the term was used is that, even when it was used to describe a specific, contemporary, regional variant, there is some evidence that it was also being used synonymously with the term base ball. The most striking example of this comes from Texas in 1859. In the March 1, 1859 edition of the Galveston Civilian and Gazette Weekly, an article mentions a game of “base ball” that had been recently played in Austin. The Colorado Citizen of Columbus, Texas, on March 5, 1859, describes the same game but refers to it as “an interesting game of ‘town ball…’” This raises interesting questions about how terms such as town ball, base ball and round ball were used in the first half of the 19th century and whether we can draw true distinctions between the regional base ball variants. Columbus is about one hundred and twenty-five miles from Galveston and it’s likely that what we’re seeing is nothing more than an application of local terms to a baseball variant played in Austin. It’s also possible that the local variants of baseball played in Texas were similar enough that people in Columbus and Galveston were comfortable applying their local terms to the variant played in Austin. On the other hand, it’s possible that the terms used to describe the game were so vague and undeveloped that they could be used to describe any number of baseball variants.
But Texas is not the only place where we see confusion in the terms. We also see it in the greater St. Louis area in the years leading up to the Civil War. In Alton, Illinois, which is located just twenty miles north of St. Louis, there is a record of clubs playing a local baseball variant in 1858 that is described in the local newspapers as “the old and popular pastime of ‘Base Ball.’”23 However, in St. Louis itself, we find the local variant described as “old town ball.”24 One would expect, with the cultural influence that St. Louis exerted upon satellite cities such as Alton, to see a uniformity in the terms used to describe the local baseball variant but this is not the case. It’s possible that the Alton variant was different enough from the St. Louis variant that they were two different games that needed to be distinguished by two different terms but there is sufficient evidence to support the idea that the local baseball variants played in central Illinois and eastern Missouri was called town ball and the Alton paper’s use of the term base ball is rather unique. But, again, it’s possible that the terms used to describe local baseball variants in the United States in the first half of the 19th century were malleable and undefined, even within a specific geographical area.
So, in trying to understand what town ball was, it is necessary to illustrate how the term was being used and what it was describing. We see it used in the first half of the 19th century and through the Civil War era to describe a specific local base ball variant, such as in Philadelphia or Cincinnati. Sometimes, as in Texas and St. Louis, the term is malleable enough to be used concurrently with the term baseball. Towards the end of the 19th century and into the 20th century, as people began to look back at the antebellum era and write the first histories of the Trans-Appalachian West, we see the term used more generally to describe all local baseball variants, regardless of what they were called at the time. This use of the term town ball was linked with the modern game of baseball and described as its immediate predecessor. By exploring how the term was specifically used throughout the 19th century, we begin to gain an understanding of what town ball was. This understanding can be furthered by a closer examination of the sources.
We have countless references to town ball from the 19th century, found in both the primary and secondary source material. Obviously, some of these sources are more significant than others and some are much more detailed than others. Within some of these sources, we can find details about local baseball variants played throughout the United States and about the games that were described, specifically and generally, as town ball. This source material displays the richness of the American baseball tradition as well as the adaptability of the game to regional circumstances. These characteristics of the American baseball experience – the richness of the American ball-playing culture and the adaptability of American baseball games to an endless set of circumstances – would have a profound influence on the evolution of the modern game.
While it would be erroneous, or overly simplistic, to say that the modern game of baseball evolved from town ball, the culture out of which town ball developed is the same culture from which the modern game sprung. The culture that created the local baseball variants in the first half of the 19th century also created the local variant in New York that would spread across the nation in the late 1850s. While the history of baseball obviously focuses on the origins, evolution and spread of the New York game, it’s very instructive to look at other predecessor games, such as the town ball variants. Studying the spread patterns of the older baseball variants illuminates our understanding of the spread of the New York game. Looking at the details of the game play in the older variants helps us to understand how baseball specifically developed into its modern form.
As previously mentioned, there was no specific national game called town ball, with a universal, codified set of rules. It was simply a term used to describe the local baseball variant and later evolved into a term used to describe most predecessor games played in the United States in the first half of the 19th century. The descriptions of town ball play, found in the source material, reflects this as we find variations in the number of players per side, the number of innings played, the method by which a game is won, the way a player could be put out, how an inning was brought to an end, the shape of the field, the number of bases as well as variations in equipment used to play the game. A closer look at some of these sources will show this.
One of the earliest known sources that provide details about town ball play comes from Lewis D. Campbell, a Congressman from Ohio, who was quoted in an 1854 newspaper article. Campbell stated that when he was a schoolboy, playing town ball, “two boys acted as captains. In making choice of their parties, one spit upon a chip and tossed it up. If the wet side came uppermost, he had first choice, and if the dry one the point was settled against him.”25 Before the advent of organized ball clubs, sides were chosen randomly, picked by captains, much as school children continue to pick teams to this day.
In 1858, the Clipper noted a town ball club in Cincinnati that had a “new code of bye laws, which are more stringent than the old rules.”26 They went on to give details of the game play that included a batter’s position plus five bases that were sixty feet apart, the fly rule and no plugging. This reference is a perfect example of the variety found in regional baseball variants. Later accounts of town ball usually mentioned that the game had the batter’s position and four bases and that plugging was a prominent part of the play. The adoption of the fly rule is also something that is often seen in other descriptions of the town ball variants.
Some details of Philadelphia town ball are found in a newspaper from 1859. “…Germantowners are getting up a grand match of town ball, to take place on the afternoon of Thanksgiving day, at the corner of Queen street and plank road. The Marion and Honey Run Ball Clubs, of Germantown, are the contestants. Each club will consist of twenty practical players.”27 Here we see the adaptability of the game to various numbers of players, including twenty a side.
In 1860, the Clipper provides details about a town ball match in Evansville, Indiana. “A match of Town Ball was contested between the married and single members of the Evansville Town Ball Club…The correspondent, to whom we are indebted for the above report, says that the rules and regulations of the game of town ball, vary a great deal. There, an innings is not concluded until all are out…”28 A box score, indicating that a five inning game was played, was provided with the account. Also in 1860, we find an account of an eight inning “match game of town-ball” played in Covington, Kentucky.29 These two sources shows us how the number of innings played in a town ball match could vary and one way in which a side could be but out.
Peverelly’s National Game reprints a box score from a town ball match between the Olympic and Excelsior clubs that it notes was originally published “c. 1860.”30 The match, which was played eleven men a side, was an eleven inning affair that was won by the Olympics by a score of 87-71. We learn from the box score that outs could be recorded on the fly or the bound and it also included numbers for outs made in territory “Behind” the batter. Compared with the account of the 1859 Germantown match, it appears that there were variations even within something as organized as Philadelphia town ball.
In the later part of the 19th century, as previously noted, we begin to see accounts of town ball play appearing in secondary sources. While these are not contemporary accounts of town ball play, they are usually the reminiscences of people who had played town ball variants in their youth. It should go without saying that human memory is a frail and faulty thing and there should be no doubt that there are factual errors contained in these secondary accounts. But they are still an excellent account of town ball variants, even if, in many cases, they may be describing games that were never contemporarily called town ball.
In March 1879, we find one of these school-day remembrances appearing in Scribner’s Monthly. Edwards Eggleston wrote that he played town ball in his youth “in a free and happy way, with soft balls, primitive bats, and no nonsense. There were no scores, but a catch or a cross-out in town-ball put the whole side out, leaving the others to take the bat or “paddle” as it was appropriately called.”31 This is a notable reference because it gives us three details that are often mentioned regarding town ball play: a soft ball (which made soaking more palatable), a flat bat or paddle and the cross-out, whereby an out was recorded by throwing the ball across the runner’s path.
Naturally enough, Henry Chadwick weighed in with details of town ball play. In 1886, he wrote that “The pitcher in town ball was only allowed to toss or pitch the ball to the bat…the ball in ‘town ball’ was ten inches in circumference and weighed six ounces…”32 Writing in Sporting Life in 1890, he noted that town ball was played on a field with four bases and that you could put out “baserunners by hitting them with the thrown ball…”33 While Chadwick’s ideas about the origins of the modern game of baseball were not exactly correct, he was prescient in noting the connection between American and European baseball games and his thoughts on the significance of earlier baseball variants such as town ball are rather interesting.
Also, in 1890, Henry Philpott published A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball, which contained a detailed description of town ball play. Beginning with a description of the Cat family of games, Philpott wrote that “Up to eight players, the simple ‘old cat’ games were the commonest. With more than eight we usually played ‘town-ball.’ It was plainly evolved out of the cat games, for it retained all their rules.”34 Two of the rules of the Cat games that Philpott noted was used in town ball play were the cross-out and one-out/all-out rules that we’ve seen noted in earlier references. He also noted that, unlike the Cat games, there was a single batting station in town ball and, also, that the number of running bases increased with the number of players. In town ball, he wrote, “an organized band of indefinite numbers” roamed the field with “nothing to do but catch the balls he misses or only ‘ticks’ or knocks foul…scouring the field for his ‘flies,’ or stopping his ‘grounders’ and crossing him out.”35 Philpott also noted that “there was as yet no distinction between base-men and fielders. After the pitcher and catcher had been selected, the others on that side went where they pleased and they did not get the bat until they had put all the batters out. Nay, when all but one had been put out, he could sometimes call back to his assistance any one he chose of his slaughtered comrades; and he often had a rubber ball which, if he did not burst it, he could drive to the other side of the hay-field.”36 Philpott also wrote about the malleable nature of town ball rules, stating that they were not as strict as the modern baseball rules, that there was no umpire to enforce them and that they were often set and agreed upon prior to the start of the game. A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball is a fascinating article and Philpott postulates several theories about the evolution of bat and ball games in the United States. His description of the ball games he played or witnessed as both a school-boy and a teacher in the Western United States and their relationship to each other is a valuable piece of baseball scholarship.
Another detailed account of school-boy play came from Charles Henry Smith, a Georgia politician and noted raconteur. In The Farm and the Fireside, a book written under his nom de plume Bill Arp and published in 1892, Smith wrote about playing town ball as a young boy in Georgia in the 1830s. He remembered that, in town ball, “The pitcher used to belong to the ins and threw the best ball he could, for he wanted it hit, and knocked as far away as possible…We used to throw at a boy to stop him running to another base, and we hit him if we could…We used to take an old rubber shoe and cut it into strings and wind it tight into a ball until it was half grown and then finish it with yarn that was unraveled from an old woolen sock…Oh, my, how those balls would bounce, and yet they didn’t hurt very bad when hit by them. They were sweet to throw and sweet to catch…When we played town-ball some of the outs would circle away off 200 yards, and it was glorious to see them catch a ball that had nearly reached the sky as it gracefully curved from the stroke of the bat.”37 Smith gives a rather nice description of the game’s soft ball and the interesting detail that the pitcher belonged to the team that was at bat.
We find another nice description of town ball play in 1899. In an article in Mind and Body, it was noted that town ball “was played by any convenient number, usually from four to a dozen on each side…A home base and four others were marked on the ground. The first inning was decided by lot. Each side had a pitcher and catcher; the others of the outs were scattered about the field outside the circuit of bases, but without any systematic arrangement. The ball being soft, crossing out or hitting the one who was running the bases was in order. There was no umpire.”38 This account offers nice details about the organization of the defense, which patrolled the field without the “systematic arrangement” that would evolve in modern baseball.
In 1905, an account of town ball play was presented to the Mills Commission by a gentleman named H.H. Waldo. In letter to the commission, Waldo stated that “I commenced playing ball seventy years ago…A few years later the school boys played what was called ‘Town Ball.’ That consisted of a catcher, thrower, 1st goal, 2nd goal and home goal. The inner field was diamond shape; the outer field was occupied by the balance of the players, number not limited. The outs were as followed: Three strikes, tick and catch, ball caught on the fly, and base runner hit or touched with the ball off from the base. That was sometimes modified by Over the fence and out.”39 The rule that any ball hit over the fence was an out is seen in other sources but the most interesting thing about Waldo’s account is that the version of town ball he played in the late 1830s and early 1840s had only three bases rather than the more common four bases. Waldo also noted that “I do not recall an instance of a money bet on the game; but…the side losing had to buy the ginger bread and cider.”40
Another interesting account of town ball play comes from the annotations to a poem written in 1905, memorializing Senator Marcus Hanna of Ohio. The notes to the poem stated that “If a batter missed a ball and the catcher behind took it, he was ‘caught out.’ Three ‘nips’ also put him out. He might be caught out on ‘first bounce.’ If the ball were thrown across his path while running the bases, he was out. One peculiar feature was that the last batter on a side might bring his whole side in by successfully running to first base and back six times in succession, touching first base with his bat after batting. This was not often, but sometimes done; and we were apt to hold back our best batter to the last, which we called ‘saving up for six-maker.’”41 Variations of all of these rules have been noted but the specific form of bringing teammates back to life is indeed a “peculiar feature” of this town ball variant.
A description of Cincinnati town ball play was published in 1907 by Henry Ellard, whose father had played the game. Ellard wrote that the game was “played on a field with bases marked at about one-half the distance of baseball. A short bat, which is used with only one hand only, was employed in knocking a ball that was much smaller and much softer than a baseball. Four innings only were played, and the number playing on each side could vary from ten to fifteen. The scores ranged about the same as early baseball, yet in looking over the old score-book of games of townball played in Cincinnati during the war, we find one of 146-21.”42 It’s interesting to compare this reference, which was based on Ellard’s father’s scorebooks, to the previously noted 1858 account of town ball in Cincinnati. The discrepancies between the two accounts illustrates the malleable nature of early bat and ball games and should give pause to anyone wishing to make definitive statements about the nature of town ball.
The 1910 History of Henry County, Illinois, gives a description of the base paths in a Central Illinois town ball game. The author noted that, in 1835, “we played ‘town ball.’ There was a pitcher and catcher. We ran a circle, and being hit by the ball was out, or the man running the bases could be ‘crossed out,’ by throwing the ball across the path ahead of him as he ran.”43 There are other references to circular base paths in town ball play but most accounts describe or imply a straight path between bases.
Another detailed account of town ball play comes from a history of life in Eastern Pennsylvania. Writing about the earliest schools in Catasauqua, Pennsylvania in the 1840s and 1850s, William Glace stated that “Among the games for boys was one called town-ball…The bat was a heavy paddle…There were four corners, like the points of a square figure; sometimes five corners, an extra one between the second and third, making the points of a pentagon. If the batter struck at the ball and missed it and the catcher caught it he was out; but if he hit it he had to run and make his base. If the ball was caught on the fly or even one bound he was out. All the players had to be made out; then the side would select its best batter to bat and if he succeeded in making three “home-runs,” his side could star anew; otherwise the fielders would take their turn at the bat.”44 Again, we see another variation of a way for a side to remain at the bat although this one is unique in that the life-saving measure takes place after everyone is put out rather than with the last batter. Glace also noted the use of a soft ball.
There are countless secondary sources from the late 19th and early 20th century that provide descriptions of town ball play and no two are exactly alike. While it would be interesting to categorize all the variations of game play and note that many of the town ball variants employed a soft ball, soaking, the cross-out, some form of life-saving final at-bat, etc., the things that all of the town ball variants had in common are the same things that all forms of American baseball games have in common: pitching, catching, hitting, throwing, running, safe-haven bases, in and out sides and the malleability of the rules. It is almost irrelevant whether or not a specific town ball variant employed a soft ball or a flat bat or had five bases. It’s not particularly important whether or not they played one-out/all-out or the whole side had to be put out. The rules could change on a day to day basis and different forms of the game could be played in the same geographical region. The most important thing that these secondary sources provide is not a detailed look at town ball variants but rather a glimpse into the general ball-playing culture of 19th century America. It shows us that well before the advent and spread of the New York game, the United States was a nation of ballplayers. And it just so happened that a lot of these ballplayers called the game they played town ball.
We can attempt to define town ball but the answer would be unsatisfying. We can say that it was a bat and ball, safe-haven game played in United States in the 19th century and that variants of the game likely predated the earliest known references. We can say that most variants employed soaking and a soft ball. But any definition of town ball eludes us when we look at the details of game play found in the source material. Was a flat or round bat used? We have sources that show both. Were there three bases or four or five or more? We have sources that show all of those. Did they play one-out/all-out or all-out/all-out? It depends on when and where the game was played. Was there two innings or five or eleven? It depends on which variant we’re talking about. What about cross-outs and fly-outs? These seem to have been a form of recording outs in most variants of town ball but it’s impossible to say more than that. It seems impossible to do anything more than to sketch out a broad definition of town ball and the possibility of finding more primary source material is unlikely to change that. The best that we will be able to do, given more sources, is to better define local town ball variants and that is something that is worth more time, effort and research. Rather than thinking about town ball in general terms, we need to be thinking about specific games played in specific geographical areas at a specific time. A rich variety of baseball games played existed throughout the United States in the first half of the 19th century and these games are what need to be investigated and researched.
1 The History of Menard and Mason Counties, Illinois; Baskin and Company; Chicago, 1879. p 252.
2 Dickson, Paul; The Dickson Baseball Dictionary; W.W. Norton & Company, 2011. p 884.
3 Alton Weekly Courier, June 3, 1858, p 1.
4 Sporting Life, August 12, 1905
5 Thorn, John; Baseball in the Garden of Eden; pp 309-310n.
6 Herschberger, Richard. “The Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia.” Our Game. September 18, 2011. Web. September 6, 2012. [http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2011/09/18/the-olympic-ball-club-of-philadelphia/]
7 Freyer, John and Mark Rucker. Peverelly’s National Game. p 97.
8 Trap Ball Advertised at Inn [1822.4]. Protoball. [http://protoball.org/Chronology:_1800_-_1840].
9 Ryczek, William. Baseball’s First Inning. p 114.
10 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870. pp 141-142 and 162-166.
11 Charleston [SC] Courier, November 29, 1859.
12 Most notably St. Louis Daily Bulletin, May 4, 1860, and Missouri Republican, June 8, 1862.
13 Olmsted, Rev. E.B. The Home Missionary, p 188
14 All-Out-Side-Out Town Ball Played in Indiana [1860.35], Protoball [http://protoball.org/Chronology:_1840_-_1870] and Dawsons Fort Wayne Daily Times, May 16, 1861
15 Colorado Citizen [Columbus, TX], March 5, 1859 and Heartsill, W.W., Fourteen Hundred and 91 Days in the Confederate Army: A Journal Kept by W.W. Heartsill: Day-by-Day, of the W.P. Lane (Texas) Rangers, from April 19th 1861 to May 20th 1865, various entries.
16 Nevard, David; Town Ball; http://mysite.verizon.net/vze11te3p/townball2.htm
17 Block, David; Baseball Before We Knew It; p 157-158
18 Ibid
19 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870; p 247
20 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870; p 71
21 Davenport Daily Gazette; May 28, 1858
22 Baseball Before We Knew It; p 157
23 Various sources including Alton Weekly Courier, June 24, 1858.
24 St. Louis Daily Bulletin, May 4, 1860
25 Daily Cleveland Herald, March 20, 1854.
26 Protoball Chronology entyr 1857.7
27 North American and United States Gazette (Philadelphia), November 21, 1859.
28 Protoball Chronology entry 1860.35
29 Cincinnati Daily Press, November 12, 1860
30 Peverelly’s National Game, p 99.
31 Some Western School-Masters; Scribner’s Monthly, Volume 17, Issue 5 (March 1879); p 751.
32 The National Game: A Full History Of Its Origin; Kansas City Star; April 10, 1886
33 Sporting Life, February 5, 1890
34 Philpott, Henry J.; A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball; The Popular Science Monthly, Volume 37 (September 1890); Edited by William Jay Youmans; p 655.
35 Ibid, p 656.
36 Ibid.
37 Arp, Bill; The Farm and the Fireside: Sketches of Domestic Life in War and Peace; Constitution Publishing Company, 1892; pp 267-268.
38 Mind and Body, Volume 6; Freidenker Publishing Co., 1899; p 232.
39 Protoball Chronology entry 1835.4
40 Protoball Chronology entry 1846.9
41 Protoball Chronology entry 1850s.20
42 Ellard, Henry; Baseball in Cincinnati: A History; Johson and Hardin; 1907 (reprinted by McFarland, 2004), p 17.
43 Kiner, Henry L.; History of Henry County, Illinois, Volume 1; The Pioneer Publishing Company; Chicago; 1910; p 389.
44 Glace, William H.; Early History and Reminiscences of Catasauqua in Pennsylvania; Searle & Dressler; 1914
When wading into the morass of these secondary sources, as well as the few primary sources that mention town ball in the first half of the 19th century, it quickly becomes obvious that, although people were using the same term to describe a game they played as a child, nobody was describing the same game. The term “town ball,” as used in the secondary sources of the late 19th century and early 20th century, appears to be a catchall that described variants of an unregulated folk game played by children and young adults. Certainly, these games had a great deal in common. There is no doubt that they were bat and ball, safe haven games that involved pitching, hitting, catching and running and there is a great deal of evidence to suggest these games spread across the United States from common sources. But it is also clear that there was not a specific, national set of rules governing a specific, national game called town ball. As used in these secondary sources, the term “town ball” has a very general meaning that describes “various versions of early baseball” that were played throughout the United States in the first half of the 19th century.2
Complicating matters is the fact that these baseball variants that were generally referred to, in the secondary sources, as town ball also had regionally specific names at the time they were being played. Games that were generally labeled as town ball in 1880 very well may have been called town ball in 1850. They also could have been called round ball or base ball or long town or round town or any of a variety of names that have been documented. In Illinois, for example, a series of county histories were written in the late 19th century and, within them, we find countless recollections about a game called town ball being played in Illinois in the first half of the 19th century. However, there is nothing in the primary source material that corroborates this. Instead, we find a source from 1858 that describes a local bat and ball variant played in Alton, Illinois, that was called “the old and popular pastime of ‘Base Ball.’”3 It is obvious from descriptions of the games played in Alton that this was not the New York game but, rather, one of the local baseball variant that was being described, forty years later, as town ball.
Another example of the semantic confusion that surrounds town ball is the Massachusetts Game. A very specific and well-documented baseball variant, the Massachusetts Game has often been described as being town ball and the two terms have been used synonymously. But prior to its codification in 1858, it appears that the local baseball variant in Massachusetts was known as round ball or Massachusetts round ball and that “No game called Town Ball was known in Massachusetts.”4 So while the Massachusetts Game was a general town ball game, as the term was used in the secondary sources in the late 19th century, the local baseball variant in Massachusetts was probably never called town ball.
So while it appears that the term “town ball” developed, in the later part of the 19th century, to describe regional baseball variants played in the first half of the century, regardless of what they were called at the time, there is primary source evidence that shows the term being used as a name for specific games played during the first half of the century. The most famous example of this would be the baseball variant that developed in Philadelphia in the late 1820s and we find the earliest known reference to town ball in the May 14, 1838, edition of Philadelphia’s Public Ledger. In a letter to the editor, a gentleman described a game that he witnessed in Camden, New Jersey: “A small distance from the woods, I beheld a party of young men, the majority of whom I afterwards distinguished to be Market street merchants; and who styled themselves the ‘Olympic Club,’ a title well answering to its name by the manner in which the party amused themselves in the recreant pleasure of town ball, and several other games.”5 This is, of course, a reference to the Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia, which according to Richard Herschberger, “was by far the longest-lived baseball club of the amateur era. Its origins go as far back as 1831, when a group of Philadelphians in their twenties gathered to play ball. Two years later they merged with another group, which was loosely organized and went by the name ‘Olympic.’ The combined group kept this name and adopted a formal constitution.” He goes on to note that the club “crossed the Delaware River to play in Camden, New Jersey” due to the availability there of open spaces for play.6 In the Book of American Pastimes, Charles Peverelly also described the origins of the club, noting that when the club met for the first time, in the spring of 1831, “there were but four players, and the game was ‘Cat Ball,’ or what is called in some parts of New England, ‘Two Old Cat.’ The players, who were then over 25 years old, told some of their younger friends of the pleasure and advantage they found in resuming their boyish sports, and invited them to join and make up a number large enough for a game of Town Ball.”7
It’s apparent, based upon Peverelly’s account, that there was ball-playing in Philadelphia prior to the formation of town ball clubs in the early 1830s. Trap Ball was being played in the city by 18228 and William Ryczek, in Baseball’s First Inning, notes that town ball was being played in the city by the late 1820s.9 There can be no doubt that there was a strong and vibrant ball-playing culture in Philadelphia prior to the formation of the Olympic Club and ball-playing there probably dates back to the late 17th or early 18th century. By the late 1820s, these local ball-playing traditions had produced a unique and specific game that was known as town ball and this game would be remain popular in Philadelphia through the 1850s.
In Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky, the local ball-playing culture, during the antebellum era, also produced a game known locally as town ball. There is primary source evidence of town ball clubs in Cincinnati as well as in Brooklyn, Newport and Covington, Kentucky, and these clubs were active in the 1850s and through the war years.10 The primary source material also shows a specific game called town ball being played in South Carolina11, Missouri12, Illinois13, Indiana14, Texas15, Utah16, Louisiana17, California18, Wisconsin19, Western New York20 and Iowa.21 These sources range in date from the 1840s through the Civil War years, involve games played by organized clubs as well as more informal games and establish that specific baseball variants, locally known as town ball, evolved throughout the United States in antebellum era.
It should be noted, however, that these games were not related to each other in any official manner; these games most likely developed independently of each other and any commonality that the games shared reflected the general nature of bat and ball games in the United States. While the common source of these games were the bat and ball games brought to North America by English colonists in the 17th century, as these ancestor games spread across the continent, they were adapted, changed and evolved into the variants that the locals called town ball. These variants that we see throughout the United States, prior to the spread of the New York game, is evidence of a broad ball-playing culture that existed in the 19th century and spread across the continent with the Anglo-American settlers.
If these games were essentially unrelated variants of older bat and ball games, an interesting question arises as to how they ended up with the same name. How did all of these baseball variants come to be called town ball? There is an old canard that the term came about because the game was played at town meetings but there is no evidence to support this. It is possible that the term originated in the East and spread West along with the ancestor games and it’s also possible that the term is a corruption of the term round ball, which was commonly used in the East as a name of the local baseball variant. But, again, there is no evidence to support this. What we know is that the term town ball, along with round ball and base ball, was “one of the three most common designations for American baseball in the first half of the nineteenth century.”22 It’s likely that more research will discover earlier references to the game that will shed light on the etymology of the term town ball but, as of now, we don’t know enough to speculate intelligently on how the term developed and spread across the country.
One interesting aspect of how the term was used is that, even when it was used to describe a specific, contemporary, regional variant, there is some evidence that it was also being used synonymously with the term base ball. The most striking example of this comes from Texas in 1859. In the March 1, 1859 edition of the Galveston Civilian and Gazette Weekly, an article mentions a game of “base ball” that had been recently played in Austin. The Colorado Citizen of Columbus, Texas, on March 5, 1859, describes the same game but refers to it as “an interesting game of ‘town ball…’” This raises interesting questions about how terms such as town ball, base ball and round ball were used in the first half of the 19th century and whether we can draw true distinctions between the regional base ball variants. Columbus is about one hundred and twenty-five miles from Galveston and it’s likely that what we’re seeing is nothing more than an application of local terms to a baseball variant played in Austin. It’s also possible that the local variants of baseball played in Texas were similar enough that people in Columbus and Galveston were comfortable applying their local terms to the variant played in Austin. On the other hand, it’s possible that the terms used to describe the game were so vague and undeveloped that they could be used to describe any number of baseball variants.
But Texas is not the only place where we see confusion in the terms. We also see it in the greater St. Louis area in the years leading up to the Civil War. In Alton, Illinois, which is located just twenty miles north of St. Louis, there is a record of clubs playing a local baseball variant in 1858 that is described in the local newspapers as “the old and popular pastime of ‘Base Ball.’”23 However, in St. Louis itself, we find the local variant described as “old town ball.”24 One would expect, with the cultural influence that St. Louis exerted upon satellite cities such as Alton, to see a uniformity in the terms used to describe the local baseball variant but this is not the case. It’s possible that the Alton variant was different enough from the St. Louis variant that they were two different games that needed to be distinguished by two different terms but there is sufficient evidence to support the idea that the local baseball variants played in central Illinois and eastern Missouri was called town ball and the Alton paper’s use of the term base ball is rather unique. But, again, it’s possible that the terms used to describe local baseball variants in the United States in the first half of the 19th century were malleable and undefined, even within a specific geographical area.
So, in trying to understand what town ball was, it is necessary to illustrate how the term was being used and what it was describing. We see it used in the first half of the 19th century and through the Civil War era to describe a specific local base ball variant, such as in Philadelphia or Cincinnati. Sometimes, as in Texas and St. Louis, the term is malleable enough to be used concurrently with the term baseball. Towards the end of the 19th century and into the 20th century, as people began to look back at the antebellum era and write the first histories of the Trans-Appalachian West, we see the term used more generally to describe all local baseball variants, regardless of what they were called at the time. This use of the term town ball was linked with the modern game of baseball and described as its immediate predecessor. By exploring how the term was specifically used throughout the 19th century, we begin to gain an understanding of what town ball was. This understanding can be furthered by a closer examination of the sources.
We have countless references to town ball from the 19th century, found in both the primary and secondary source material. Obviously, some of these sources are more significant than others and some are much more detailed than others. Within some of these sources, we can find details about local baseball variants played throughout the United States and about the games that were described, specifically and generally, as town ball. This source material displays the richness of the American baseball tradition as well as the adaptability of the game to regional circumstances. These characteristics of the American baseball experience – the richness of the American ball-playing culture and the adaptability of American baseball games to an endless set of circumstances – would have a profound influence on the evolution of the modern game.
While it would be erroneous, or overly simplistic, to say that the modern game of baseball evolved from town ball, the culture out of which town ball developed is the same culture from which the modern game sprung. The culture that created the local baseball variants in the first half of the 19th century also created the local variant in New York that would spread across the nation in the late 1850s. While the history of baseball obviously focuses on the origins, evolution and spread of the New York game, it’s very instructive to look at other predecessor games, such as the town ball variants. Studying the spread patterns of the older baseball variants illuminates our understanding of the spread of the New York game. Looking at the details of the game play in the older variants helps us to understand how baseball specifically developed into its modern form.
As previously mentioned, there was no specific national game called town ball, with a universal, codified set of rules. It was simply a term used to describe the local baseball variant and later evolved into a term used to describe most predecessor games played in the United States in the first half of the 19th century. The descriptions of town ball play, found in the source material, reflects this as we find variations in the number of players per side, the number of innings played, the method by which a game is won, the way a player could be put out, how an inning was brought to an end, the shape of the field, the number of bases as well as variations in equipment used to play the game. A closer look at some of these sources will show this.
One of the earliest known sources that provide details about town ball play comes from Lewis D. Campbell, a Congressman from Ohio, who was quoted in an 1854 newspaper article. Campbell stated that when he was a schoolboy, playing town ball, “two boys acted as captains. In making choice of their parties, one spit upon a chip and tossed it up. If the wet side came uppermost, he had first choice, and if the dry one the point was settled against him.”25 Before the advent of organized ball clubs, sides were chosen randomly, picked by captains, much as school children continue to pick teams to this day.
In 1858, the Clipper noted a town ball club in Cincinnati that had a “new code of bye laws, which are more stringent than the old rules.”26 They went on to give details of the game play that included a batter’s position plus five bases that were sixty feet apart, the fly rule and no plugging. This reference is a perfect example of the variety found in regional baseball variants. Later accounts of town ball usually mentioned that the game had the batter’s position and four bases and that plugging was a prominent part of the play. The adoption of the fly rule is also something that is often seen in other descriptions of the town ball variants.
Some details of Philadelphia town ball are found in a newspaper from 1859. “…Germantowners are getting up a grand match of town ball, to take place on the afternoon of Thanksgiving day, at the corner of Queen street and plank road. The Marion and Honey Run Ball Clubs, of Germantown, are the contestants. Each club will consist of twenty practical players.”27 Here we see the adaptability of the game to various numbers of players, including twenty a side.
In 1860, the Clipper provides details about a town ball match in Evansville, Indiana. “A match of Town Ball was contested between the married and single members of the Evansville Town Ball Club…The correspondent, to whom we are indebted for the above report, says that the rules and regulations of the game of town ball, vary a great deal. There, an innings is not concluded until all are out…”28 A box score, indicating that a five inning game was played, was provided with the account. Also in 1860, we find an account of an eight inning “match game of town-ball” played in Covington, Kentucky.29 These two sources shows us how the number of innings played in a town ball match could vary and one way in which a side could be but out.
Peverelly’s National Game reprints a box score from a town ball match between the Olympic and Excelsior clubs that it notes was originally published “c. 1860.”30 The match, which was played eleven men a side, was an eleven inning affair that was won by the Olympics by a score of 87-71. We learn from the box score that outs could be recorded on the fly or the bound and it also included numbers for outs made in territory “Behind” the batter. Compared with the account of the 1859 Germantown match, it appears that there were variations even within something as organized as Philadelphia town ball.
In the later part of the 19th century, as previously noted, we begin to see accounts of town ball play appearing in secondary sources. While these are not contemporary accounts of town ball play, they are usually the reminiscences of people who had played town ball variants in their youth. It should go without saying that human memory is a frail and faulty thing and there should be no doubt that there are factual errors contained in these secondary accounts. But they are still an excellent account of town ball variants, even if, in many cases, they may be describing games that were never contemporarily called town ball.
In March 1879, we find one of these school-day remembrances appearing in Scribner’s Monthly. Edwards Eggleston wrote that he played town ball in his youth “in a free and happy way, with soft balls, primitive bats, and no nonsense. There were no scores, but a catch or a cross-out in town-ball put the whole side out, leaving the others to take the bat or “paddle” as it was appropriately called.”31 This is a notable reference because it gives us three details that are often mentioned regarding town ball play: a soft ball (which made soaking more palatable), a flat bat or paddle and the cross-out, whereby an out was recorded by throwing the ball across the runner’s path.
Naturally enough, Henry Chadwick weighed in with details of town ball play. In 1886, he wrote that “The pitcher in town ball was only allowed to toss or pitch the ball to the bat…the ball in ‘town ball’ was ten inches in circumference and weighed six ounces…”32 Writing in Sporting Life in 1890, he noted that town ball was played on a field with four bases and that you could put out “baserunners by hitting them with the thrown ball…”33 While Chadwick’s ideas about the origins of the modern game of baseball were not exactly correct, he was prescient in noting the connection between American and European baseball games and his thoughts on the significance of earlier baseball variants such as town ball are rather interesting.
Also, in 1890, Henry Philpott published A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball, which contained a detailed description of town ball play. Beginning with a description of the Cat family of games, Philpott wrote that “Up to eight players, the simple ‘old cat’ games were the commonest. With more than eight we usually played ‘town-ball.’ It was plainly evolved out of the cat games, for it retained all their rules.”34 Two of the rules of the Cat games that Philpott noted was used in town ball play were the cross-out and one-out/all-out rules that we’ve seen noted in earlier references. He also noted that, unlike the Cat games, there was a single batting station in town ball and, also, that the number of running bases increased with the number of players. In town ball, he wrote, “an organized band of indefinite numbers” roamed the field with “nothing to do but catch the balls he misses or only ‘ticks’ or knocks foul…scouring the field for his ‘flies,’ or stopping his ‘grounders’ and crossing him out.”35 Philpott also noted that “there was as yet no distinction between base-men and fielders. After the pitcher and catcher had been selected, the others on that side went where they pleased and they did not get the bat until they had put all the batters out. Nay, when all but one had been put out, he could sometimes call back to his assistance any one he chose of his slaughtered comrades; and he often had a rubber ball which, if he did not burst it, he could drive to the other side of the hay-field.”36 Philpott also wrote about the malleable nature of town ball rules, stating that they were not as strict as the modern baseball rules, that there was no umpire to enforce them and that they were often set and agreed upon prior to the start of the game. A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball is a fascinating article and Philpott postulates several theories about the evolution of bat and ball games in the United States. His description of the ball games he played or witnessed as both a school-boy and a teacher in the Western United States and their relationship to each other is a valuable piece of baseball scholarship.
Another detailed account of school-boy play came from Charles Henry Smith, a Georgia politician and noted raconteur. In The Farm and the Fireside, a book written under his nom de plume Bill Arp and published in 1892, Smith wrote about playing town ball as a young boy in Georgia in the 1830s. He remembered that, in town ball, “The pitcher used to belong to the ins and threw the best ball he could, for he wanted it hit, and knocked as far away as possible…We used to throw at a boy to stop him running to another base, and we hit him if we could…We used to take an old rubber shoe and cut it into strings and wind it tight into a ball until it was half grown and then finish it with yarn that was unraveled from an old woolen sock…Oh, my, how those balls would bounce, and yet they didn’t hurt very bad when hit by them. They were sweet to throw and sweet to catch…When we played town-ball some of the outs would circle away off 200 yards, and it was glorious to see them catch a ball that had nearly reached the sky as it gracefully curved from the stroke of the bat.”37 Smith gives a rather nice description of the game’s soft ball and the interesting detail that the pitcher belonged to the team that was at bat.
We find another nice description of town ball play in 1899. In an article in Mind and Body, it was noted that town ball “was played by any convenient number, usually from four to a dozen on each side…A home base and four others were marked on the ground. The first inning was decided by lot. Each side had a pitcher and catcher; the others of the outs were scattered about the field outside the circuit of bases, but without any systematic arrangement. The ball being soft, crossing out or hitting the one who was running the bases was in order. There was no umpire.”38 This account offers nice details about the organization of the defense, which patrolled the field without the “systematic arrangement” that would evolve in modern baseball.
In 1905, an account of town ball play was presented to the Mills Commission by a gentleman named H.H. Waldo. In letter to the commission, Waldo stated that “I commenced playing ball seventy years ago…A few years later the school boys played what was called ‘Town Ball.’ That consisted of a catcher, thrower, 1st goal, 2nd goal and home goal. The inner field was diamond shape; the outer field was occupied by the balance of the players, number not limited. The outs were as followed: Three strikes, tick and catch, ball caught on the fly, and base runner hit or touched with the ball off from the base. That was sometimes modified by Over the fence and out.”39 The rule that any ball hit over the fence was an out is seen in other sources but the most interesting thing about Waldo’s account is that the version of town ball he played in the late 1830s and early 1840s had only three bases rather than the more common four bases. Waldo also noted that “I do not recall an instance of a money bet on the game; but…the side losing had to buy the ginger bread and cider.”40
Another interesting account of town ball play comes from the annotations to a poem written in 1905, memorializing Senator Marcus Hanna of Ohio. The notes to the poem stated that “If a batter missed a ball and the catcher behind took it, he was ‘caught out.’ Three ‘nips’ also put him out. He might be caught out on ‘first bounce.’ If the ball were thrown across his path while running the bases, he was out. One peculiar feature was that the last batter on a side might bring his whole side in by successfully running to first base and back six times in succession, touching first base with his bat after batting. This was not often, but sometimes done; and we were apt to hold back our best batter to the last, which we called ‘saving up for six-maker.’”41 Variations of all of these rules have been noted but the specific form of bringing teammates back to life is indeed a “peculiar feature” of this town ball variant.
A description of Cincinnati town ball play was published in 1907 by Henry Ellard, whose father had played the game. Ellard wrote that the game was “played on a field with bases marked at about one-half the distance of baseball. A short bat, which is used with only one hand only, was employed in knocking a ball that was much smaller and much softer than a baseball. Four innings only were played, and the number playing on each side could vary from ten to fifteen. The scores ranged about the same as early baseball, yet in looking over the old score-book of games of townball played in Cincinnati during the war, we find one of 146-21.”42 It’s interesting to compare this reference, which was based on Ellard’s father’s scorebooks, to the previously noted 1858 account of town ball in Cincinnati. The discrepancies between the two accounts illustrates the malleable nature of early bat and ball games and should give pause to anyone wishing to make definitive statements about the nature of town ball.
The 1910 History of Henry County, Illinois, gives a description of the base paths in a Central Illinois town ball game. The author noted that, in 1835, “we played ‘town ball.’ There was a pitcher and catcher. We ran a circle, and being hit by the ball was out, or the man running the bases could be ‘crossed out,’ by throwing the ball across the path ahead of him as he ran.”43 There are other references to circular base paths in town ball play but most accounts describe or imply a straight path between bases.
Another detailed account of town ball play comes from a history of life in Eastern Pennsylvania. Writing about the earliest schools in Catasauqua, Pennsylvania in the 1840s and 1850s, William Glace stated that “Among the games for boys was one called town-ball…The bat was a heavy paddle…There were four corners, like the points of a square figure; sometimes five corners, an extra one between the second and third, making the points of a pentagon. If the batter struck at the ball and missed it and the catcher caught it he was out; but if he hit it he had to run and make his base. If the ball was caught on the fly or even one bound he was out. All the players had to be made out; then the side would select its best batter to bat and if he succeeded in making three “home-runs,” his side could star anew; otherwise the fielders would take their turn at the bat.”44 Again, we see another variation of a way for a side to remain at the bat although this one is unique in that the life-saving measure takes place after everyone is put out rather than with the last batter. Glace also noted the use of a soft ball.
There are countless secondary sources from the late 19th and early 20th century that provide descriptions of town ball play and no two are exactly alike. While it would be interesting to categorize all the variations of game play and note that many of the town ball variants employed a soft ball, soaking, the cross-out, some form of life-saving final at-bat, etc., the things that all of the town ball variants had in common are the same things that all forms of American baseball games have in common: pitching, catching, hitting, throwing, running, safe-haven bases, in and out sides and the malleability of the rules. It is almost irrelevant whether or not a specific town ball variant employed a soft ball or a flat bat or had five bases. It’s not particularly important whether or not they played one-out/all-out or the whole side had to be put out. The rules could change on a day to day basis and different forms of the game could be played in the same geographical region. The most important thing that these secondary sources provide is not a detailed look at town ball variants but rather a glimpse into the general ball-playing culture of 19th century America. It shows us that well before the advent and spread of the New York game, the United States was a nation of ballplayers. And it just so happened that a lot of these ballplayers called the game they played town ball.
We can attempt to define town ball but the answer would be unsatisfying. We can say that it was a bat and ball, safe-haven game played in United States in the 19th century and that variants of the game likely predated the earliest known references. We can say that most variants employed soaking and a soft ball. But any definition of town ball eludes us when we look at the details of game play found in the source material. Was a flat or round bat used? We have sources that show both. Were there three bases or four or five or more? We have sources that show all of those. Did they play one-out/all-out or all-out/all-out? It depends on when and where the game was played. Was there two innings or five or eleven? It depends on which variant we’re talking about. What about cross-outs and fly-outs? These seem to have been a form of recording outs in most variants of town ball but it’s impossible to say more than that. It seems impossible to do anything more than to sketch out a broad definition of town ball and the possibility of finding more primary source material is unlikely to change that. The best that we will be able to do, given more sources, is to better define local town ball variants and that is something that is worth more time, effort and research. Rather than thinking about town ball in general terms, we need to be thinking about specific games played in specific geographical areas at a specific time. A rich variety of baseball games played existed throughout the United States in the first half of the 19th century and these games are what need to be investigated and researched.
1 The History of Menard and Mason Counties, Illinois; Baskin and Company; Chicago, 1879. p 252.
2 Dickson, Paul; The Dickson Baseball Dictionary; W.W. Norton & Company, 2011. p 884.
3 Alton Weekly Courier, June 3, 1858, p 1.
4 Sporting Life, August 12, 1905
5 Thorn, John; Baseball in the Garden of Eden; pp 309-310n.
6 Herschberger, Richard. “The Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia.” Our Game. September 18, 2011. Web. September 6, 2012. [http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2011/09/18/the-olympic-ball-club-of-philadelphia/]
7 Freyer, John and Mark Rucker. Peverelly’s National Game. p 97.
8 Trap Ball Advertised at Inn [1822.4]. Protoball. [http://protoball.org/Chronology:_1800_-_1840].
9 Ryczek, William. Baseball’s First Inning. p 114.
10 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870. pp 141-142 and 162-166.
11 Charleston [SC] Courier, November 29, 1859.
12 Most notably St. Louis Daily Bulletin, May 4, 1860, and Missouri Republican, June 8, 1862.
13 Olmsted, Rev. E.B. The Home Missionary, p 188
14 All-Out-Side-Out Town Ball Played in Indiana [1860.35], Protoball [http://protoball.org/Chronology:_1840_-_1870] and Dawsons Fort Wayne Daily Times, May 16, 1861
15 Colorado Citizen [Columbus, TX], March 5, 1859 and Heartsill, W.W., Fourteen Hundred and 91 Days in the Confederate Army: A Journal Kept by W.W. Heartsill: Day-by-Day, of the W.P. Lane (Texas) Rangers, from April 19th 1861 to May 20th 1865, various entries.
16 Nevard, David; Town Ball; http://mysite.verizon.net/vze11te3p/townball2.htm
17 Block, David; Baseball Before We Knew It; p 157-158
18 Ibid
19 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870; p 247
20 Base Ball Pioneers, 1850-1870; p 71
21 Davenport Daily Gazette; May 28, 1858
22 Baseball Before We Knew It; p 157
23 Various sources including Alton Weekly Courier, June 24, 1858.
24 St. Louis Daily Bulletin, May 4, 1860
25 Daily Cleveland Herald, March 20, 1854.
26 Protoball Chronology entyr 1857.7
27 North American and United States Gazette (Philadelphia), November 21, 1859.
28 Protoball Chronology entry 1860.35
29 Cincinnati Daily Press, November 12, 1860
30 Peverelly’s National Game, p 99.
31 Some Western School-Masters; Scribner’s Monthly, Volume 17, Issue 5 (March 1879); p 751.
32 The National Game: A Full History Of Its Origin; Kansas City Star; April 10, 1886
33 Sporting Life, February 5, 1890
34 Philpott, Henry J.; A Little Boys’ Game With A Ball; The Popular Science Monthly, Volume 37 (September 1890); Edited by William Jay Youmans; p 655.
35 Ibid, p 656.
36 Ibid.
37 Arp, Bill; The Farm and the Fireside: Sketches of Domestic Life in War and Peace; Constitution Publishing Company, 1892; pp 267-268.
38 Mind and Body, Volume 6; Freidenker Publishing Co., 1899; p 232.
39 Protoball Chronology entry 1835.4
40 Protoball Chronology entry 1846.9
41 Protoball Chronology entry 1850s.20
42 Ellard, Henry; Baseball in Cincinnati: A History; Johson and Hardin; 1907 (reprinted by McFarland, 2004), p 17.
43 Kiner, Henry L.; History of Henry County, Illinois, Volume 1; The Pioneer Publishing Company; Chicago; 1910; p 389.
44 Glace, William H.; Early History and Reminiscences of Catasauqua in Pennsylvania; Searle & Dressler; 1914